Are private schools better?

It is in recognition of the merit of private schools
that the Act says they must reserve seats for the poor. Why not give students
a 100 per cent choice?

The Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act entrusts
the government with the responsibility to ensure that every child gets
quality education in India. Does this mean that every child has to go
to a building called “government school”? Is the school’s
ownership really critical to assuring education? Does it really matter
to parents and children where they get quality education?

The government guarantees education but this need not
be achieved only through government schools. Sadly, many believe that
schools have to be built, owned and operated by the government. These
educationists seem to have turned a blind eye to the changing reality
of the education landscape in India.

Parents are getting tired of teachers’ absenteeism
and lack of accountability in government schools where 52 per cent of
class-five students can’t even read to match up to the level of
class-two (Annual Status of Education Report, 2009). They are increasingly
rejecting free government schools and choosing fee-charging private schools.
The Aser 2009 report shows that close to 22 per cent of children in rural
India attend private schools. This number is much higher in urban areas
with states like Punjab and Haryana at the forefront, where two out of
every three children attend private school.

Most of these children study not in elite schools but
in budget private schools in poor neighbourhoods. These schools charge
an average fee of Rs 70-150 per month in rural areas, and up to Rs 350
per month in urban areas. The budget private schools are the fastest-growing
segment in India’s education ecosystem.

Should government undermine or support the choices that
the poor are making with their hard-earned money? The aam aadmi government
should support the aam aadmi. There are three good reasons for this. One,
private schools provide better education; two, they are more cost-effective;
and three, they are more accountable and responsive to parents. These
schools also offer English-medium schooling that is preferred by parents
today.

Studies by Geeta Kingdon, James Tooley and Aser 2009
suggest that private schools indeed provide better education, though the
extent of the difference in quality varies in the studies. Private school
students have as much as a 41 per cent advantage in English as compared
to government school students even when adjusted for socio-economic and
other factors (Aser 2009).

As for the cost-effectiveness, there is hardly any debate.
It has been widely established by researchers from across India, such
as SM Kansal for Delhi, SC Jain for Gujarat, R Govinda and NV Varghese
for Madhya Pradesh and Geeta Kingdon for Uttar Pradesh, that per-pupil
expenditure in budget private schools is vastly below that of state schools.
A major difference stems from the fact that salaries of teachers in private
unaided schools are four- to-seven times lower than that of government
schools.

Private schools provide relatively better quality education
at a much cheaper cost. How should government respond to this reality?
The answer is simple: Fund students, not schools! Public money should
follow the child, not the school, through school vouchers. The school
that the parents and students choose should get the funding. The government
should fix an amount that it wants to spend on every student, and transfer
funds to schools in relation to the number of students enrolled. Instead
of current lump sum funding, the state schools would receive their grant
depending on the number of students they attract and retain.

Under this “student first” (as opposed to
“school first”) system of financing, all schools will compete
for all children, rich and poor, and all schools will be accountable to
all parents, rich and poor. This would enhance parental choice which would
further healthy competition among schools, both government or private,
and improve their quality.

The new Act already recognises this reality and offers
25 per cent of seats in private schools to government-sponsored poor students.
Wouldn’t it be better if the other 75 per cent of the poor children
also had similar choice? We would then move from the Right to Education
to what would actually assure quality education for all, the Right to
Education of Choice.